commit f4020b2cc4fe45c9e8bfe47fc73deccd867cf9de
Author: Hiltjo Posthuma
AuthorDate: Tue Mar 20 21:25:30 2018 +0100
Commit: Hiltjo Posthuma
CommitDate: Tue Mar 20 21:25:30 2018 +0100
fix regression by selecting clipboard text
"restore the old behaviour that the primary doesn'
commit a5a928bfc1dd049780a45e072cb4ee42de7219bf
Author: Hiltjo Posthuma
AuthorDate: Tue Mar 20 21:22:27 2018 +0100
Commit: Hiltjo Posthuma
CommitDate: Tue Mar 20 21:22:27 2018 +0100
don't modify argv, use a counter
on some platforms (OpenBSD) this changes the exposed argv in
commit 6f0f2b7ec3713351de274707672fbadb6cc727a2
Author: Hiltjo Posthuma
AuthorDate: Tue Mar 20 21:29:10 2018 +0100
Commit: Hiltjo Posthuma
CommitDate: Tue Mar 20 21:29:10 2018 +0100
bump version to 0.8.1
diff --git a/config.mk b/config.mk
index b2eac10..039c42c 100644
--- a/config.m
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 07:14:48PM +0800, Pickfire wrote:
> "Devin J. Pohly" wrote:
> >
> > This won't work - the Term instance is now internal to st.c, and IS_SET
> > in x.c refers to win.mode (on the TermWindow instance) which doesn't
> > contain MODE_ALTSCREEN.
> >
> > How about checking it in
"Devin J. Pohly" wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 11:23:08PM +0800, Ivan Tham wrote:
> > This allows MODE_ALTSCREEN to be applied to scrollback patch in x.c
> > ---
> > st.c | 11 ---
> > st.h | 11 +++
> > 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/
2018-03-20 6:56 GMT-03:00 Markus Teich :
> The patch is borderline feature-creep, but still fine. As mentioned earlier
> I currently don't have access to my key, so if no one else want's to do the
> honor (feel free to!), the author has to wait until some time in April when
> I'll be able to merge
Am 2018-03-20 04:20, schrieb Quentin Rameau:
> Don't you think it's worth it?
I don't think so, but at the end of the day, Markus will make the
decision and that's what matters. The maintainer decides what to merge
and what not.
Same as Laslo on this.
The patch is borderline feature-creep, b
> +#elif __OpenBSD__
> +#elif __OpenBSD__
Also, for more robustness you should use
#elif defined(__OpenBSD__)
You shouldn't test its evaluated expanded value, but only if it is
defined or not.
(then I'd replace matching #ifdef with #if defined(), but I guess
that's more a matter of taste)
> Hello,
>
> > If you're going to do this for every module for every OS you're
> > planning on supporting, this is a bad start imho.
>
> Well, i will only support Linux and OpenBSD - and almost half of the
> modules is POSIX-compliant anyway.
>
> > What would you think about rather separating
